More Like this

1. Choosing an engineering major: A conceptual model of student pathways into engineering

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20429  

   Main, Joyce B. ; Griffith, Amanda L. ; Xu, Xinrui ; Dukes, Alexandra M. ( October 2021 , Journal of Engineering Education)

   Increasing interest and participation in engineering is vital if the United States is to create the larger technological and scientific labor force it needs to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Students' pathways into the different engineering majors provide important information for this effort.

   This study addresses which factors across life stages (pre‐high school, high school, and early college) are associated with engineering major choice. The quantitative analysis identifies which demographic characteristics and academic achievement variables are correlated with engineering major choice, whereas the qualitative analysis examines when and why students choose a specific engineering major.

   Informed by the life course perspective, this convergent mixed methods research study applies Logit regression and thematic analysis. Data sets include more than 20,000 observations of student‐level academic records (2001–2015) as well as interviews conducted with 20 students at a large, research‐intensive university in the Midwest.

   Quantitative results indicate that student demographic factors and measures of academic achievement—including passing scores on advanced placement tests, scholastic aptitude test scores, and high school and college first‐year grade point averages—are associated with engineering major choice. Qualitative findings show that across the life stages, the source of social influence in engineering major choice varies; while family and teachers play larger roles before and during high school, peers and university personnel play larger roles in early college.

   The conceptual model comprehensively synthesizes the key factors associated with engineering major choice, highlighting the importance of demographic factors, academic achievement, social networks, and access to role models from pre‐high school, high school, and early college.

    

   more » « less
2. Exploring experiences that foster recognition in engineering across race and gender

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20587  

   McIntyre, Brianna Benedict ; Scalaro, Kelsey ; Godwin, Allison ; Kirn, Adam ; Verdín, Dina ( April 2024 , Journal of Engineering Education)

   Students' recognition beliefs have emerged as one of the most important components of engineering role identity development for early‐career undergraduate students. Recognition beliefs are students' perceptions of how meaningful others, such as peers, instructors, and family, see them as engineers. However, little work has investigated the experiences that facilitate recognition beliefs, particularly across the intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender. Investigation of these experiences provides ways to understand how recognition may be supported in engineering environments and how White and masculine norms in engineering can shape marginalized students' experiences.

   We examined how specific experiences theorized to promote recognition are related to recognition beliefs for students at the intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender. Based on self‐reported demographics, we created 10 groups, including Asian, Black, Latino and Hispanic, Indigenous, and White cisgender men and Asian, Black, Latinè/x/a/o and Hispanic, Indigenous, and White ciswomen, trans, and non‐binary individuals. This article describes the patterns within each intersectional group rather than drawing comparisons across the groups, which can perpetuate raced and gendered stereotypes.

   The data came from a survey distributed in Fall 2017 (n = 2316). Ten multiple regression models were used to understand the recognition experiences that influenced students' recognition beliefs by intersectional group.

   There is no one‐size‐fits‐all approach to developing students' recognition beliefs. For example, family members referring to the student as an engineer are positively related to recognition beliefs for Asian, Black, Latino and Hispanic, and White cisgender men. Friends seeing Asian and White marginalized gender students as an engineer is predictive of recognition beliefs. Other recognition experiences, such as receiving compliments from an engineering instructor or peer about their engineering design and contributions to the team, do not influence the recognition beliefs of these early‐career engineering students.

   This article emphasizes the need to draw on multiple experiences to support the equitable development of early‐career engineers across race, ethnicity, and gender, and reveals patterns for recognition that may support future scholarship on effective classroom practices for recognition.

    

   more » « less
3. Nascent Professional Identity Development in Freshman Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Women

   Ofori-Boadu, Andrea N. ; Ofori-Boadu, Victor ; Vanderpool, Jacob ; Deng, Dongyang ( June 2020 , ASEE annual conference exposition)

   Miller, Eva (Ed.)

   Nascent Professional Identity Development in Freshman Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) Women Increasing the persistence of talented women into male-dominated architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) professions could reduce prevailing workforce shortages and improve gender diversity in AEC industry. Identity theorists advocate that professional identity development (PID) improves students’ persistence to become professionals. However, little empirical research exists to inform and guide AEC educators and professionals on AEC-PID in undergraduate AEC women. As the preliminary part of a larger nationwide and longitudinal research study investigating PID processes in undergraduate AEC women, the objective of this research is to examine the characteristics and nascent AEC-PID in 69 women enrolled in freshman AEC courses in five U.S. institutions. A purposive sampling approach ensures participants have a wide range of demographic characteristics. Data from a recruitment survey is analyzed using the NVivo qualitative data analysis software. Content and relational inductive open coding are conducted vertically for each participant and horizontally across different participants. Results indicate passion/interest, inherent abilities, significant others, benefits from industry, and desire to contribute to industry influence decisions to pursue AEC careers. With 52% of participants having science, technology, engineering, art, and math (STEAM) subject preferences, an in vivo code, Perfect Middle Ground, demonstrated the quest to combine STEM and visual art preferences in AEC career decisions. A participant noted that ‘this major (civil engineering) is the perfect middle ground because I can be creative, but still use my strong gift which happens to be math’. Girls with STEAM strengths and passion, particularly in math and fine art, are most likely to develop nascent AEC-PID. Beyond STEM pre-college programs, AEC educators should consider recruiting from sports, as well as visual and performing arts events for pre-college students. Participants’ positive views focus on the importance and significant societal impact of the AEC industry; while, negative views focus on the lack of gender and racial diversity. A combination of participants’ AEC professional experiences and views reveal four increasing levels of nascent AEC-PID which are categorized as the 4Ps: Plain, Passive, Progressive, and Proactive. As a guide to AEC education and professional communities, recommendations are made to increase the AEC-PID of women in each category. With the highest nascent AEC-PID, women in the Proactive category should serve as leaders in AEC classrooms and student organizations. Considering their AEC professional experience and enthusiasm, they should serve as peer mentors to other students, particularly AEC women. Furthermore, they should be given the opportunity to step into more complex roles during internships and encouraged to pursue co-op opportunities. Insights can guide more targeted recruitment, mentoring, preparation, and retention interventions that strengthen the persistence of the next generation of AEC women professionals. In the long term, this could reduce AEC workforce shortages, improve gender diversity, and foster the innovation and development of more gender friendly AEC products and services. 

   more » « less
4. The Centrality of Black Identity for Black Students in Engineering

   Mobley, Catherine ; Brawner, Catherine E. ; Brent, Rebecca ; Orr, Marisa K. ( January 2021 , Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity (CoNECD) Conference)

   Introduction and Theoretical Frameworks Our study draws upon several theoretical foundations to investigate and explain the educational experiences of Black students majoring in ME, CpE, and EE: intersectionality, critical race theory, and community cultural wealth theory. Intersectionality explains how gender operates together with race, not independently, to produce multiple, overlapping forms of discrimination and social inequality (Crenshaw, 1989; Collins, 2013). Critical race theory recognizes the unique experiences of marginalized groups and strives to identify the micro- and macro-institutional sources of discrimination and prejudice (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). Community cultural wealth integrates an asset-based perspective to our analysis of engineering education to assist in the identification of factors that contribute to the success of engineering students (Yosso, 2005). These three theoretical frameworks are buttressed by our use of Racial Identity Theory, which expands understanding about the significance and meaning associated with students’ sense of group membership. Sellers and colleagues (1997) introduced the Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity (MMRI), in which they indicated that racial identity refers to the “significance and meaning that African Americans place on race in defining themselves” (p. 19). The development of this model was based on the reality that individuals vary greatly in the extent to which they attach meaning to being a member of the Black racial group. Sellers et al. (1997) posited that there are four components of racial identity: 1. Racial salience: “the extent to which one’s race is a relevant part of one’s self-concept at a particular moment or in a particular situation” (p. 24). 2. Racial centrality: “the extent to which a person normatively defines himself or herself with regard to race” (p. 25). 3. Racial regard: “a person’s affective or evaluative judgment of his or her race in terms of positive-negative valence” (p. 26). This element consists of public regard and private regard. 4. Racial ideology: “composed of the individual’s beliefs, opinions and attitudes with respect to the way he or she feels that the members of the race should act” (p. 27). The resulting 56-item inventory, the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (MIBI), provides a robust measure of Black identity that can be used across multiple contexts. Research Questions Our 3-year, mixed-method study of Black students in computer (CpE), electrical (EE) and mechanical engineering (ME) aims to identify institutional policies and practices that contribute to the retention and attrition of Black students in electrical, computer, and mechanical engineering. Our four study institutions include historically Black institutions as well as predominantly white institutions, all of which are in the top 15 nationally in the number of Black engineering graduates. We are using a transformative mixed-methods design to answer the following overarching research questions: 1. Why do Black men and women choose and persist in, or leave, EE, CpE, and ME? 2. What are the academic trajectories of Black men and women in EE, CpE, and ME? 3. In what way do these pathways vary by gender or institution? 4. What institutional policies and practices promote greater retention of Black engineering students? Methods This study of Black students in CpE, EE, and ME reports initial results from in-depth interviews at one HBCU and one PWI. We asked students about a variety of topics, including their sense of belonging on campus and in the major, experiences with discrimination, the impact of race on their experiences, and experiences with microaggressions. For this paper, we draw on two methodological approaches that allowed us to move beyond a traditional, linear approach to in-depth interviews, allowing for more diverse experiences and narratives to emerge. First, we used an identity circle to gain a better understanding of the relative importance to the participants of racial identity, as compared to other identities. The identity circle is a series of three concentric circles, surrounding an “inner core” representing one’s “core self.” Participants were asked to place various identities from a provided list that included demographic, family-related, and school-related identities on the identity circle to reflect the relative importance of the different identities to participants’ current engineering education experiences. Second, participants were asked to complete an 8-item survey which measured the “centrality” of racial identity as defined by Sellers et al. (1997). Following Enders’ (2018) reflection on the MMRI and Nigrescence Theory, we chose to use the measure of racial centrality as it is generally more stable across situations and best “describes the place race holds in the hierarchy of identities an individual possesses and answers the question ‘How important is race to me in my life?’” (p. 518). Participants completed the MIBI items at the end of the interview to allow us to learn more about the participants’ identification with their racial group, to avoid biasing their responses to the Identity Circle, and to avoid potentially creating a stereotype threat at the beginning of the interview. This paper focuses on the results of the MIBI survey and the identity circles to investigate whether these measures were correlated. Recognizing that Blackness (race) is not monolithic, we were interested in knowing the extent to which the participants considered their Black identity as central to their engineering education experiences. Combined with discussion about the identity circles, this approach allowed us to learn more about how other elements of identity may shape the participants’ educational experiences and outcomes and revealed possible differences in how participants may enact various points of their identity. Findings For this paper, we focus on the results for five HBCU students and 27 PWI students who completed the MIBI and identity circle. The overall MIBI average for HBCU students was 43 (out of a possible 56) and the overall MIBI scores ranged from 36-51; the overall MIBI average for the PWI students was 40; the overall MIBI scores for the PWI students ranged from 24-51. Twenty-one students placed race in the inner circle, indicating that race was central to their identity. Five placed race on the second, middle circle; three placed race on the third, outer circle. Three students did not place race on their identity circle. For our cross-case qualitative analysis, we will choose cases across the two institutions that represent low, medium and high MIBI scores and different ranges of centrality of race to identity, as expressed in the identity circles. Our final analysis will include descriptive quotes from these in-depth interviews to further elucidate the significance of race to the participants’ identities and engineering education experiences. The results will provide context for our larger study of a total of 60 Black students in engineering at our four study institutions. Theoretically, our study represents a new application of Racial Identity Theory and will provide a unique opportunity to apply the theories of intersectionality, critical race theory, and community cultural wealth theory. Methodologically, our findings provide insights into the utility of combining our two qualitative research tools, the MIBI centrality scale and the identity circle, to better understand the influence of race on the education experiences of Black students in engineering. 

   more » « less
5. Determinants of Intra-major Specialization and Career Decisions Among Undergraduate Biomedical Engineering Students

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s43683-023-00133-3  

   Miller, Isabel ; Lopez-Alvarez, Grisel ; Cardador, M. Teresa ; Jensen, Karin J. ( February 2024 , Biomedical Engineering Education)

   Biomedical engineering is a broad and interdisciplinary field that prepares graduates for a variety of careers across multiple career sectors. Given this breadth, undergraduate degree programs often have formal or informal opportunities for students to further specialize within the biomedical engineering major to develop skills in subdisciplines of biomedical engineering. While previous work has explored factors that influence student decision-making of engineering major choice, including the role of gender, limited work has explored factors that influence intra-major specialization in biomedical engineering. The present study sought to expand on existing research to understand factors that influence biomedical engineering students’ choice of intra-major specializations and how, if at all, these factors are related to gender. Grounded in social cognitive career theory, the present study leveraged quantitative surveys from undergraduate biomedical engineering students to understand factors influencing intra-major specialization choice, including the impact that students viewed on their career plans. Participants rated multiple factors as important in their intra-major specialization decisions, with professors/classes rated as the most important influence and alumni as the lowest. Similarly, participants rated multiple outcome expectations of their specialization, although income was rated lower than other factors. Participants most commonly indicated interest in pursuing careers in industry and medicine. We found some differences in intra-major specialization, outcome expectations, and career interests by gender, with women students indicating a higher influence of professors/classes and higher expectations for their track decision to provide a career with a good income. Further understanding of how undergraduate students select specializations in engineering coursework will inform curriculum design and student advising.

    

   more » « less